MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4246129680 · doi:10.5194/gmd-2018-190

Convective response to large-scale forcing in the Tropical Western Pacific simulated by spCAM5 and CanAM4.3

2018· preprint· en· W4246129680 on OpenAlexaffabout
Toni Mitovski, Jason N. S. Cole, N. A. McFarlane, Knut von Salzen, Guang J. Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvective available potential energyPrecipitationConvectionClimatologyFree convective layerAtmospheric sciencesForcing (mathematics)Environmental scienceTroposphereAtmospheric convectionConvective inhibitionAtmosphere (unit)MeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Changes in the large-scale environment during convective precipitation events in the Tropical Western Pacific simulated by version 4.3 of the Canadian Atmospheric Model (CanAM4.3) is compared against those simulated by version 5.0 of the super parameterized Community Atmosphere Model (spCAM5). This is done by compositing sub-hourly output of convective rainfall, convective available potential energy (CAPE), CAPE generation due to large-scale forcing in the free troposphere (dCAPELSFT), and near surface vertical velocity (ω) over the time period May–July 1997. Compared to spCAM5, CanAM4.3 tends to produce more frequent light convective precipitation ( 2 mm h−1). In spCAM5 5 % of convective precipitation events lasted less than 1.5 h and 75 % lasted between 1.5 and 3.0 h while in CanAM4.3 80 % of the events lasted less than 1.5 h. Convective precipitation in spCAM5 is found to be a function of dCAPELSFT and the large-scale near surface ω with variations in ω slightly leading variations in convective precipitation. Convective precipitation in CanAM4.3 does not have the same dependency and instead is found to be a function of CAPE.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→